Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Appeals court denies former National Security adviser @GenFlynn ’s effort to force a judge to immediately dismiss charges
cbs ^

Posted on 08/31/2020 9:19:44 AM PDT by janetjanet998

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last
To: Williams

Very predictable. Judges out of control.


61 posted on 08/31/2020 10:19:32 AM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gcparent

Think she wanted immediate dismissal.


62 posted on 08/31/2020 10:20:36 AM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: janetjanet998

Gateway Pundit is calling this a win for Flynn, because it is a refusal of mandamus, which Sullivan wanted, so he could pick another judge to continue Flynn’s trial. So the appeals court sent it back to Sullivan to CLOSE the case. With dispatch. Meaning asap.
Any legal beagles out there know if the above is correct?


63 posted on 08/31/2020 10:24:41 AM PDT by Flaming Conservative ((Pray without ceasing))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gratia
This is a perfectly normal and unexceptional application of the law governing writs of mandamus.

The Court had several options for directing Judge Sullivan to follow the law and the Constitution which he is ignoring. They chose to do nothing and used mandamus as the excuse. A political decision, no doubt.

64 posted on 08/31/2020 10:29:31 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: conservativepoet

Looks like Gateway Pundit has made a correction in the title of the article. They took out “RIGHTLY.” So it looks like GP has changed it’s tune on whether this was a good ruling.


65 posted on 08/31/2020 10:30:34 AM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: janetjanet998

Take it to the USSC. They’ve already ruled on this.


66 posted on 08/31/2020 10:30:44 AM PDT by CodeToad (Arm Up! They Have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flaming Conservative

See post 65.


67 posted on 08/31/2020 10:32:11 AM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: janetjanet998

So if the DOJ is not prosecuting Flynn, will the Judge take over the case himself?


68 posted on 08/31/2020 10:34:17 AM PDT by Sans-Culotte (Does the left like anything about America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativepoet

Ah. Thank you. That was very confusing.


69 posted on 08/31/2020 10:37:16 AM PDT by Flaming Conservative ((Pray without ceasing))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Flaming Conservative

You’re welcome.


70 posted on 08/31/2020 10:40:31 AM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

So you are saying that when deciding a write of mandamus, the law governing mandamus should be ignored and something else should be done?


71 posted on 08/31/2020 10:48:20 AM PDT by Gratia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.

“Is a pardon next?”

Why would you need a pardon when the government has dropped the case.

No, they will let this play out to see just how corrupt Emmett is.

They want it to stall until beyond the election to keep Flynn out of this Administration, with the hopes that Trump will lose. That is the goal.


72 posted on 08/31/2020 11:14:26 AM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Flaming Conservative
Gateway Pundit is calling this a win for Flynn, because it is a refusal of mandamus, which Sullivan wanted...

Pretty confusing IMHO. Here is the text of Sidney's Tweet:

1h: "The En Banc D.C. Circuit has denied the writ of mandamus requested by @GenFlynn -- split as expected along lines evident from the tone and tenor of the judges at oral argument. The opinion and dissents are here. https://sidneypowell.com/the-michael-t-flynn-case… It is a disturbing blow to the #RuleOfLaw"

73 posted on 08/31/2020 11:14:41 AM PDT by truthkeeper (All Trump Has Going for Him is the Votes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Gratia
the law governing mandamus should be ignored and something else should be done?

No. Courts, especially Federal Courts of Appeals are reluctant to grant mandamus, with some good reasons. The Courts use appeals to correct and discipline District Judges, but an appeal can only be filed when the District Judge issues a judgment, which Judge Sullivan has refused to do.

The Court could have issued a Writ of Prohibitiion without granting mandamus. Such writs limits the options available to the District Judge. This would have probably been the best option given that the case was essentially dead and the only true option to Judge Sullivan was to dismiss. The Court could have done this, but chose not to do it. Why, because they liked what Judge Sullivan is doing it because it suits their political agenda.

74 posted on 08/31/2020 11:16:03 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper

Thank you!


75 posted on 08/31/2020 11:23:02 AM PDT by Flaming Conservative ((Pray without ceasing))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

So a court can issue a writ of prohibition without being asked?

Why didn’t Powell ask for a writ of prohibition?

And you are saying that the court was politically corrupt because they did not issue a writ of prohibition despite not being asked?


76 posted on 08/31/2020 11:57:01 AM PDT by Gratia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Gratia
So a court can issue a writ of prohibition without being asked?

Yes, they can.

Why didn’t Powell ask for a writ of prohibition?

You'd have to ask her, I think that it would have been a better option.

And you are saying that the court was politically corrupt because they did not issue a writ of prohibition despite not being asked?

No. My opinon on their corruption was discussed in detail when the Court agreed to grant an en banc hearing. You are welcome to look at that. Check my posts

You are trolling. Goodbye.

77 posted on 08/31/2020 12:07:12 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Ah, name calling.

You knew the question about jurisdiction was coming, didn’t you?

Gratz! You got off the hook!


78 posted on 08/31/2020 12:24:08 PM PDT by Gratia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

It was.Everything about this including the system is political.Sullivan is following obama’s orders. And the Court is protecting him. If the People don’t like that they should not have put obama in the White House.


79 posted on 08/31/2020 12:35:25 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: janetjanet998
When Flynn pled guilty it created a problem.

Once the guilty plea was entered the case was over except for sentencing. Only the judge and the defendant were left, meaning that there is/was no more prosecutor left to call off the case.

That's what Sullivan realized and it's why the en banc appeals panel agreed with him. They are following the law, as disagreeable as that is. Courts aren't going to give you a shortcut when you can get to your goal by following their rules.

There is a way to end this but Powell hasn't tried it. She can request a withdrawal of Flynn's guilty plea under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(e).

Flynn appears to be factually innocent as described in that rule and therefore qualified to have his guilty plea withdrawn. But the prosecutor can't do it. It's up to the judge, and at this point Powell hasn't asked him to.

A CHANGE OF HEART OR A CHANGE OF LAW? WITHDRAWING A GUILTY PLEA UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 32(e)

80 posted on 08/31/2020 6:20:46 PM PDT by Pelham ( Mary McCord, Sally Yates and Michael Atkinson all belong in prison.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson